Legal Opinion

Graham v. Yellow Cab Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 29, 1932No. Docket No. 7861PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHouser, J.

In a separate action against the defendant for damages for personal injuries which ensued by reason of its alleged negligence, each of the plaintiffs recovered a judgment. Por the purpose of trial the two actions were “consolidated”. The questions raised by the appellant from each of such judgments, as well as from “an order denying a new trial”, are limited to alleged errors committed by the trial court in its instruction to the jury. To all practical intents and purposes, the instruction given in the one action was identical with that given in the other. In the case of Ada I. Graham against…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Zibbell v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Treadwell v. WhittierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Sloane v. Southern California Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Merrill v. Los Angeles Gas Elec. Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
  5. May v. FarrellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Espinosa v. Beverly HospitalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
  2. Gunter v. ClaggettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  3. Armstrong v. FordCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  4. Stoltz v. ConverseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API